They couldn't have said anything. Once it exploded, there would have been no one left to make comment.I still think it was because Scutter was carrying an XD. No one should have to look at that thing.
Probably narry a word would have been said if it were a Glock.
Your language (gang?) shows your bias.It's not about scaring people, as that would be a crime (literally.)
It's about education. The more they learn that good, decent people can go out and shop, see a movie, have supper, etc., all while armed and not being adorned with a little metal shield, and no harm comes of it; the more that "Susie Soccermom" sees that that man who just happened to be standing near the curb stops her little darling who is dashing for the street and who politely answered with a "no, I'm not, but you're welcome!" when she gratefully breathed, "Thank you, Officer!", the fewer problems like this we will find. We can touch the lives of one or many at a time. This is a way to touch many lives at once and to do so positively and with respect.
I am not sure you helping old ladies across the street while packing an exposed Desert Eagle .50 is going to compensate for all the news stories on every night now about some guy somewhere who just offed 10 people with an assault rifle. You are just adding to the public perception that there are too many people running around with weapons. CC is out of sight, out of mind. Protect your rights while not scaring the civilians.
I had a hoot watching the news footage archived on opencarry.com...not exactly even-handed coverage of OC events. Pretty much every one was the same. 1] Announce scary gun event at local zoo or whatever; 2] Interview OC guy explaining why he is not a kook; 3] Fast cut to public going, WTH are all these guys doing armed at the zoo? Is Bigfoot loose or something? and 4] Cut to reporter shaking their head in dismay. The End.
Not sure how this helps the cause.
I tried to back out of this gracefully, but since I am still getting addressed in this thread, and since I am still getting kookmail, fine. I'll rejoin the discourse.
I am not sure you helping old ladies across the street while packing an exposed Desert Eagle .50 is going to compensate for all the news stories on every night now about some guy somewhere who just offed 10 people with an assault rifle. You are just adding to the public perception that there are too many people running around with weapons. CC is out of sight, out of mind. Protect your rights while not scaring the civilians.
I had a hoot watching the news footage archived on opencarry.com...not exactly even-handed coverage of OC events. Pretty much every one was the same. 1] Announce scary gun event at local zoo or whatever; 2] Interview OC guy explaining why he is not a kook; 3] Fast cut to public going, WTH are all these guys doing armed at the zoo? Is Bigfoot loose or something? and 4] Cut to reporter shaking their head in dismay. The End.
Not sure how this helps the cause.
You might be a bit drowsy. Society, in general, EXPECTS an LEO to be armed. Do you not realize this? Really? It has nothing to do with what you think is right or wrong, or what is written down in some statute. People expect an LEO to have a gun, much the same as you would expect to see a stethoscope around a doctor's neck. It's not that the LEO has more of a right to carry....it's that his/her position in society requires that he/she carry.
Besides, I know quite a few LEO's, and none of them would even think of open carrying off-duty, so this whole argument is moot anyway. The few rookies who might want to strap their badge and gun on and go strutting around town would be quickly smacked with a healthy dose of common sense about "staying under the radar" by the veteran officers.
I'm not saying that it's right or valid for Susie Soccer Mom to be scared or alarmed about someone carrying a firearm around in a public setting. I'm just saying that this is how things are in some places. Especially if open carry is rare in that area. That's why I always CC. 100% of the protection for me and my family...and none of the drama.
FAIL!!
The word "concealed" appears nowhere on my License To Carry Handguns.
This! Exactly! Society expects a LEO to be armed. Somehow, by choosing to ignore our rights and our responsibilities to protect ourselves, we, or more precisely, our ancestors, have gotten away from the expectation that we expect a man to be armed. We've somehow never developed the similar expectation that a woman will be armed in her own defense rather than only travel places with menfolk there to protect them. This is why the education aspect is so important-if it starts happening more and being seen more, then it will hopefully become unusual to see someone who is not visibly armed--however long that may take.
And in that world I described, said officers (the not-visibly-armed ones) would be the ones "not staying under the radar".
I don't OC. I'm clearly not opposed to it. The lack of education I mentioned above is the reason for the y treatment given a former customer of a store who was in compliance with their policy.
Blessings,
Bill
I tried to back out of this gracefully, but since I am still getting addressed in this thread, and since I am still getting kookmail, fine. I'll rejoin the discourse.
I am not sure you helping old ladies across the street while packing an exposed Desert Eagle .50 is going to compensate for all the news stories on every night now about some guy somewhere who just offed 10 people with an assault rifle. You are just adding to the public perception that there are too many people running around with weapons. CC is out of sight, out of mind. Protect your rights while not scaring the civilians.
I had a hoot watching the news footage archived on opencarry.com...not exactly even-handed coverage of OC events. Pretty much every one was the same. 1] Announce scary gun event at local zoo or whatever; 2] Interview OC guy explaining why he is not a kook; 3] Fast cut to public going, WTH are all these guys doing armed at the zoo? Is Bigfoot loose or something? and 4] Cut to reporter shaking their head in dismay. The End.
Not sure how this helps the cause.
So, you are going to go on, calling your fellow gun-owners "kooks" based solely on the WAY they carry?? Your way is right, and all OCers are wrong? Well, aren't we pompous.
What's next?
"Oh, I am pro -1st Amendment all the way, but only if you express your opinions in a certain way"
I would respond to this, but as most of your posts to me are blah blah commie blah blah Feinstein Lover blah blah blah, I'll just let the fact that you are proud of owning a two-tone Bersa speak for itself. OH SNAP! lol
How about responding to Bill of Right's post?
Try not to call names. Please.
You're not gonna change any OC'ers minds. I like to OC and if you don't like it, run right along side Susie. If you're not running, then you don't have a problem with it, so don't worry about Susie! She's not your problem. You just focus on keeping yourself and your family safe from me, the show off, stupid kook. Or are you not afraid of me? If you're not afraid of me, there's hope for Susie Soccermom yet. Hey, we got you to not be afraid of guns and their licensed owners. Maybe we can convince Susie, too, that I won't kill her and her extended family! But we have no chance to talk to Miss Susie to educate her if we have our guns hidden, now can we?
...A pistol carried openly has only one purpose, and that is to kill....
So, are you actually saying that as you wander the earth like the guy in Kung Fu people stop you in the street and say, "Hello! You are obviously an ambassador of gun rights, can you please take a few minutes to educate me on why carrying a gun like Wyatt Earp is a good idea?"
Riiiiight.
Yeah, I probably wouldn't go back either and give them any business. While I see many people posting that this is not a OC/CC debate but more of a coporate vs local store policy, I see it differently.
What if the store wasn't turning away law abiding gun owners, but instead they were asking gay couples to leave because "no one should have to look at that".
Gay people kissing or holding hands in an establishment may make some people uncomfortable, but you can't ask them to leave. But yet of course we are forced to accept that private establisments legally (it's legal) can strip you of your 2nd Ammendment right, but they can't ask a gay couple to leave (without a civil suit and the other hoopla that would surround it).
That is the core of this in my book. Is the laws need to recognize that no private business should be allow to negate consitionally granted rights, because imagine if ALL had strict hand gun rules, posted. We would not be able to carry any where. Any where.
Just another extreme example from me. I didn't even know what Cabelas was until this thread.